Ibn Khaldun famously said, “Geography is destiny.” Geography shapes the decisions of statesmen and generals.
This principle is exemplified by the importance of the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon. Israel cannot allow its enemies to control the Golan Heights; hence, it is compelled to control or annex them. From Israel’s perspective, these areas are strategic defense positions; in enemy hands, they become strategic threats.
Kurdistan’s significance for Israel must be understood from a similar strategic viewpoint. Under current considerations, Kurdistan is where Iran’s logistical access to its proxies can be disrupted. From this vantage point, one observes the direct land corridor extending through Iraq and Syria to Israel’s borders.
If the Kurds were supported to form their own agency in the north of Syria and Iraq and the bordering region between the two and granted control of lands from the Turkish borders of Iraq and Syria down south to where the borders of Iraq, Syria, and Jordan meet, their influence could be justified for Israel’s security. However, while this addresses the Iranian/Shia threat, it does not mitigate the other, larger threat: Turkey.
In a previous article, I delved into the history of Turkish racism and its evolution from the hierarchical structure of the Ottoman Empire’s Sharia-based system. Under that system, Muslims were superior; this notion was rebranded as “Turks” with the establishment of the Turkish Republic. In the Ottoman era, Muslims coexisted with non-Muslims (the dhimmis), but in the modern Turkish Republic, the Turkish identity was constructed to claim the land exclusively for Muslims identifying as Turks. This ideology has resulted in the nonrecognition of Kurdish identity and systemic racism against them.
If one adds to this Islamist President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s irredentist policies in the Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey poses a direct threat to Israel.
Erdogan enjoys strong domestic support, but the real issue lies in his and his AK Party’s almost total control over the revised republic. His grip on the state leaves little room for democratic opposition. Secure at home, his regime continues to expand its borders, adding northern and western Syria to the already occupied northern Cyprus.
Abroad, in the Middle East and North and West Africa, Erdogan is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood but does not hesitate to align with groups like al-Qaeda – evident in his support for Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham – or even ISIS. During the siege of Kobani, where the Kurdish-Western alliance was forged, Turkey allowed ISIS fighters to use Turkish border areas to attack Kurdish fighters from behind.
With the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, Syria has become an open field for Turkish influence. Initially, Turkey exercised control over some northern territories directly or through mercenaries now called the Syrian National Army. Today, the only ongoing war in Syria is the Turkish-directed SNA’s attacks on Kurdish regions defended by the Syrian Democratic Forces.
Since the fall of Damascus, the SNA has captured territories like Tel Rifat in northwest Syria and Manbij. Once territory is under SNA control, Turkish occupation follows, complete with Turkish-appointed governors, Ankara-paid bureaucracies, Turkish postal systems, the Turkish lira as currency, and Turkey-managed curricula. This amounts to de facto annexation, though undeclared. Yet, Turkey’s ambitions extend further.
At the UN General Assembly in 2019, Erdogan shared a map showing Turkey’s desired control of all of northern Syria. The question then arises: What would Turkey do next?
Turkey’s actions and rhetoric must be considered together. The actions reveal an irredentist pursuit of former Ottoman territories, while the rhetoric declares a mission to “liberate al-Quds” (Jerusalem), with access to Damascus as the first milestone.
A Kurdish agency controlling lands from Iran to Israel would be a valuable asset for Israel’s defense. While the Shia axis led by Iran weakens, another axis – the Turkish axis – emerges, using similar anti-Israeli rhetoric to unite Sunni Arabs under the Turkish flag.
A straightforward solution
THE SOLUTION is straightforward: support the Kurds in defeating Turkish mercenaries across northern Syria, blocking Turkish access to Damascus and further south. Kurdish legitimacy on their lands is strong, and opposition to their agency would come only from Turkey – an obstacle that could be managed. The Kurds are increasingly pro-Israel and represent the right ally for balancing regional politics.
What do the Kurds gain from this? Everything, starting with the promises made in 1918 by US president Woodrow Wilson in his Fourteen Points. The 12th point stated:
“The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities now under Ottoman rule should be assured undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity for autonomous development. The Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.”
The 12th point is as valid today as it was in 1918, not only in the case of Kurds but also in the case of the Dardanelles, where Turkey’s refusal to grant free passage to NATO navies complicates support for Ukraine against Russia.
Recognizing the historical promise to the Kurds and ensuring the free passage of the Dardanelles are essential steps in addressing modern geopolitical challenges – and in securing a more stable and strategically advantageous future for Israel in the region.
The writer, born in Iskenderun and based in Vancouver, is a writer on international politics, the Middle East, and Kurdistan. He is vice president of the Canadian Kurdistani Confederation and hosts the podcasts Rojeva Kurdistan and Nation on the Rise. On X @mhusedin